I would choose Neither Kass as the ORIGINAL tenancy is being respected, the whole issue of this thread is being to circumvent the tenancy process. My parents signed a tenancy with the council, they later exercised RTB (the shame!). However using that example their tenancy ran as normal and that was my home, theoretically if I remained at home and didn't move out, it was still under their tenancy, and there shouldn't be the assumption that the child of the original tenant is going to remain, much less "awarded" the property upon their death. In this example the tenancy hasn't been issued to Joseph, he just happens to have remained there. He is attempting to alter an original agreement to alow himself to remain and coming up against some, in my opinion, justifiable obstacles. What if he suceeds, and then has a child and history repeats itself, eventually it has to come to an end. Social housing should be set up so that the original tenancy is respected and anything else should be discretionary. If you disagree, as mentioned, explain it to the other people on the waiting list.